View Document Here - Hanford Site
View Document Here - Hanford Site
View Document Here - Hanford Site
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
Appendix E - Detailed Description of Alternative 1: DoEtu..-2oo1-11<br />
I Full Removal and Disposal Rev. e 1 DtaR fi<br />
^ RedlindStrikeout<br />
I E.2 OPERATE THE COMPLEX<br />
2<br />
3 Operation of the complex for Alternative I refers specifically to demolition and waste disposal<br />
4 operations associated with complete removal of the 221-U Building. In previous steps, the area<br />
5 surrounding 221-U would have been prepared to support building demolition, all equipment<br />
6 within the building would have been removed, and exposed surfaces inside the canyon would<br />
7 have been decontaminated or a fixative applied. The steps to operate the complex are discussed<br />
8 in the following subsections.<br />
9<br />
10 E.2.1 D&D 221-U Building<br />
11<br />
12 Conventional methods and technologies, such as wrecking balls and shears, are not suited for<br />
13 demolishing this concrete structure and are not effective when wall or floor thickness exceeds<br />
14 0.9 m. The 221 -U Facility contains structural components that typically exceed 1.5 m (5 ft) in<br />
15 thickness. The recommended demolition method is to cut the building apart using diamond wire<br />
16 saws. Most pieces would be cut to meet the ERDF size restrictions (assume 90 metric tons<br />
17 [100 tons]) and would be set directly on a transporter and moved to the disposal site. Large<br />
18 elevated pieces that would be hazardous to demolish due to their elevation and/or support<br />
19 function in the building (e.g., roof panels) would be removed intact and set on the ground for<br />
20 further size reduction.<br />
t^21<br />
22 The canyon facility can be characterized as mass concrete, and other demolition methods suitable<br />
23 to thick, lightly reinforced concrete were considered. Controlled blasting was considered to be<br />
24 impractical because it would cause considerable dust and debris, which could be difficult to<br />
25 control and could spread radioactive contamination. Additionally, it would probably disturb<br />
26 fixative coatings from adjacent areas. Stitch drilling would take longer and is more labor<br />
27 intensive, but could be used for small areas that are difficult to access with the diamond wire<br />
28 saw. Core drilling holes that are filled with expansive slurry (e.g., "Bristae' demolition<br />
29 compound) could also be used for splitting the foundation mat.<br />
30<br />
31 The diamond wire cutting technique uses a small quantity of water to cool and lubricate the wire.<br />
32 The waste water could be channeled into building's drain system, where it could be collected for<br />
33 later removal. Using this approach to demolition would make use of the segmented construction<br />
34 of the canyon structure. The canyon consists of 20 independent segments, each about 12 m<br />
35 (40 ft) long. Adjacent roof panels are keyed with a stair-step joint similar to the cover block<br />
36 edges, which would make it feasible to cut the canyon into pieces that are about 12 m(40 ft)<br />
37 long.<br />
38<br />
39 E.2.1.1 Mobilize and Erect Cranes. Cranes necessary for removal of roof panels would be<br />
40 brought to the site and erected. These cranes would be used to remove building sections as they<br />
41 are cut by the diamond wire saws.<br />
42<br />
(`,43 E.2.1.2 Remove Roof Sections. Removal would start with the end wall at the building's north<br />
44 end. The end walls are unreinforced, apparently to make future additions easier. The northeast<br />
45 end wall should be removed first because the roof removal would begin at that end of 221-U.<br />
Final Feasibility Study jor the Canyon pispos(tionln8iative(221-U Facitity)<br />
iwc :.00-1 E-12